Search results

Based on the traditional buyback model, this paper aims to propose a new buyback method – the variable buyback contract – to solve the serious inventory backlog in the current economic situation.

In this paper, the authors further study the buyback problem in a two-level supply chain with uncertain demand. Such a problem can be found in many research papers, which also use the Stackelberg game model. They put forward many factors that affect the buyback price, including risk preference, random arrival of consumers, etc. Different from the existing research, the authors propose another factor that may affect supply chain buyback – the retailer's remaining inventory to study the buyback contract.

First, the authors found that under the variable buyback contract, there is an optimal retail price, wholesale price and an optimal range of parameter settings for the buyback price. Second, the proposed Pareto-optimal solution for system improvement can achieve supply chain coordination. Third, under some conditions, the variable buyback contract is better than the wholesale price contract and fixed-price buyback contract.

First, this is the first paper to discuss to measure the buyback price with the retailer's remaining inventory. Second, the proposed buyback contract can help decision-makers to choose the optimal improvement strategies. Third, this contract has a certain practical significance, which can effectively alleviate the current inventory backlog problem.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to describe a decision support tool based on various types of contracts in a two‐level supply chain. A supply chain (SC) consists of disparate but interdependent members, dependent on each other to manage various resources (inventory, money and information). The conflicting objectives between these members may cause uncertainties in supply and demand, which can be managed by adopting coordination with the help of contracts (such as buyback, revenue sharing and quantity flexibility). Design/methodology/approach: A decision support tool for SC coordination using contracts (DSTSCCC) has been developed to explore the applicability of contracts and to compare different types of contracts in various situations. The DSTSCC is comprised of an analytical module, which is an extension of the classical newsboy problem and a simulation module. Findings: DSTSCCC helps in determining decision variables for different scenarios of contracts in the best interest of all SC members as well as whole SC. Practical implications: DSTSCCC is a simple‐to‐use and easy‐to‐implement decision making tool which helps in taking decisions prior to the actual start of SC activities. The prior decisions may help to handle future exceptions. SC members may jointly select the most profitable contract to share risks and rewards. Originality/value: DSTSCCC comprised of analytical module and simulation module presents an Integrative framework which cannot be dealt in isolation. The output of analytical module becomes input for simulation to quantify performance measures. The improvement in performance measures after satisfying the objectives of all SC members helps in realizing coordination in SC.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how customers’ self-control affects their purchase decisions and to discuss the pricing decisions of the retailer under different forms of contract.

The authors use the literature on hyperbolic discounting to model customers’ self-control problems. In this framework, the authors examine how the customers’ self-control affects the optimal pricing decision and the selection of the optimal contract form when there is a supplier and a retailer in the supply chain.

The study’s results show that when wholesale price contract is compared with buyback contract, buyback contract is better when customers’ self-control is weak; when quantity-discount contract is compared with wholesale price contract and buyback contract, although quantity discount can encourage customers to purchase more units of products, but both wholesale price contract and buyback contract can be better than quantity-discount contract in some cases. Additionally, the authors demonstrate that revenue sharing contract can increase the supply chain’s profit. The authors also find that sometimes customers’ preplan will lead to the result that the supplier produces more unhealthy products.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to analyze the decision-making of the retailer by developing an analytical framework combining customer’s self-control and supply chain contract. These results have important implications for the supplier and the retailer that sell vice goods.

The authors investigate whether the effects of stock buyback announcements on credit default swap (CDS) spread changes for US firms depend on macroeconomic conditions. The authors find that abnormal CDS spreads increase for small-sized firms announced to repurchase a higher share ratio during the normal period. In contrast, abnormal CDS spreads decrease for big-sized firms regardless of the magnitude of the repurchase ratio during the crisis period. The results of this study suggest that the wealth transfer effect dominates the signaling effect for small-sized firms with higher target ratios during the normal period. In contrast, the signaling effect is stronger for bondholders of big-sized firms during the crisis period.

This study aims to examine the value of the call option contract in hedging the risks in the supply chain. The decentralized supply chain without call option contract is first studied as the criterion model for evaluations. This paper addresses several questions: What will be the optimal manufacturer’s production quantity, retailer’s ordering and pricing policies in the presence of random demand and random yield by applying the downconversion approach? How will the call option contract influence the optimal decisions for the members of the supply chain? Can the risk from randomness be divided among the members in the supply chain through the call option contract?

This paper considers a two-level decentralized supply chain under random yield and random demand in which the manufacturer takes advantage of the downconversion approach with two scenarios, with and without option contract. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no article or study uses the downconversion approach in a supply chain regarding random yield and random demand. Furthermore, the paper considers pricing with option contract in the supply chain, which makes this article stands out significantly from other articles in the literature.

This study shows that the downconversion approach would reduce the risk caused by the random yield, which appears to be the appropriate method for the environmental goal of the supply chains. Moreover, adopting a call option contract can increase flexibility and mitigate risks, resulting in more expected members’ profits.

To simplify the model, the authors assume one manufacturer and one retailer, so extending the model to consider multiple retailers instead of one retailer and inventory sharing between them would be interesting. Considering the option and exercise prices as decision variables would be important future research topics. Put option and bidirectional option contracts could be investigated in the future. Another extension is modeling asymmetry of information in supply chain.

This paper provides managerial insights on dealing with both demand and yield risks in a manufacturer–retailer supply chain. The manufacturer has a random yield production and produces two types of vertical products: low-end and high-end. To reduce waste caused by the random yield, the manufacturer uses a downconversion approach in which low-end products are made by converting the defective high-end products. The manufacturer purchased a shortage of high-end products from the secondary market (i.e. emergency sourcing). High-end products are sold through the retailer, and low-end products are sold directly by the manufacturer. The customer demand for high-end products in the end market is random and depends on the selling price, and the customer demand for the low-end products in the secondary market is independent and random. The retailer contracts the manufacturer with the call option to obtain high-end products to meet a random demand; in fact, by using the call option contract, the authors try to balance the risks between two members. Two scenarios of with and without call option contract are proposed. After the high-end product demand is observed, the retailer would exercise the option order quantity in the call option contract scenario and then place an instant order with the manufacturer if necessary. In each scenario, the manufacturer and the retailer make their decisions simultaneously (static game) to determine the retailer’s optimal ordering and pricing policies and the optimal production quantity of the manufacturer (Nash equilibrium) by maximizing their expected profits. Finally, the impact of the model parameters on the supply chain is expressed through numerical examples. The numerical analysis shows that the call option contract provides greater profit than the wholesale price contract.

This paper's purpose is to suggest that manufacturers strategically place soft orders for assembly materials with suppliers in Silk Road Economic Belt countries who probably doubt the realization of the soft orders placed.

First, a two-stage Stackelberg competition is constructed, taking into account the supplier's trust level in formulating the decision process in the assembly supply chain. The authors then provide a buyback contract to coordinate the supply chain, in which the manufacturer obtains enough supplies by sharing some of the perceived risks of not fully trusted suppliers. Furthermore, the authors conduct a numerical study to investigate the influence of trust under a decentralized case and a buyback contract.

The authors found that all supply chain partners in Silk Road Economic Belt countries experience potential losses due to not fully trusting certain conditions. The study also shows that, in Silk Road Economic Belt countries, operating under a buyback contract is better than being without one in terms of assembly supply chain performance.

On the one hand, the authors only consider the asymmetry of demand information without considering that of cost structure information. On the other hand, a natural extension of the paper is to integrate single-period transactions into the multi-period transaction problem setting. As all these issues require substantial effort, the authors reserve them for future exploration.

Doing business with not-fully-trustworthy partners in Silk Road Economic Belt countries is risky, and this study reveals how trust works in global cooperation and with strategic reactions in situations of partial trust.

In the paper, the authors study the simultaneous influence of incentive compatibility and individual rationality (IR) on a multi-echelon supply chain (SC) under uncertainty. The authors study the impact of contract sequence on coordination strategies of a serial three-echelon SC consisting of a supplier, a manufacturer and a retailer in an uncertain environment.

The authors develop a game-theoretic framework of a serial decentralized three-echelon SC. Under a decentralized setting, the supplier and the manufacturer can choose from two contract types namely, wholesale price (WP) and linear two-part tariff (LTT) and it leads to four different cases of contract sequence.

The study show that SC coordination is possible when both the supplier and the manufacturer choose LTT contract. This study not only identifies the influence of contract sequence on profit distribution among SC agents, but also establishes cut-off policies for all SC agents for each contract sequence. This study also examine the influence of chosen contract sequence on optimal profit distribution among SC agents.

Three-echelon SC coordination under uncertain environment depends upon the contract sequence chosen by SC agents.

This study results will be helpful to managers of various SCs to take operational decisions under uncertain situations.

The main contribution of this study is that it explores the possibility of coordination by supply contracts for three-echelon SC in a fuzzy environment.

Outstanding unexercised stock options can motivate managers to engage in actions that increase the value of their company’s stock, including buying back their firm’s stock. The objective of granting stock options to managers is to align their interests with stockholders by tying a portion of their compensation to the company’s stock performance. However, unexercised stock options may have unintended consequences by providing managers with a vested interest in artificially boosting stock prices via stock buybacks. The primary objective of this research is to study the main factors that influence firms' buyback decisions amongst hospitality firms at a time when these firms were clamoring for taxpayer bailouts. Results from logistic regression seem to suggest that outstanding executive stock options are a major contributory factor in a firm’s buyback decision. Estimates also indicate that larger, more profitable firms will likely engage in stock buybacks. These findings survive a battery of tests.

The authors use logistic regression to predict the probability of a firm’s buyback decision based on a given set of exogenous explanatory variables.

The paper supports the hypothesis that buyback decisions are guided by the motive to prop support stock prices in the presence of outstanding restricted stock options/warrants granted to firms' executives.

The paper focuses on the buyback decision of U.S. hospitality firms. The results, therefore, might not be generalizable to firms in other industries or countries.

U.S. share repurchase corporate policy and government regulation needs to be revisited given the economic imperative for firms to invest in activities to restore employment and put them in a position for economic recovery.

Public criticism of the size, structure and form (i.e. loan vs grant) of COVID-19 bailouts warrants an examination of whether the factors that drive hospitality and tourism firms to repurchase shares support economic recovery.

Consistent with agency theory, the authors find a significant positive association between outstanding restricted stocks and a firm’s decision to support the stock prices by buying back shares.

This study seeks to analyze the differences between merger cancellations and three types of takeover failures: failures that are associated with targeted share repurchases (greenmail), failures in which the sole bidder simply withdraws the offer, and failures that are accompanied by a general share repurchase (buyback).

The paper uses event study methods and regression analysis.

The paper observes negative target stock price reactions around all types of takeover failures and merger cancellations. However, the cumulative effect of takeover attempts is positive, suggesting that even unsuccessful tender offers generate permanent gains to target firm shareholders, while the cumulative effect of canceled mergers is negative. Furthermore, the market reaction to greenmail‐induced takeover failure announcements is no worse than that of voluntary withdrawals, suggesting that greenmail may play an efficient role in mitigating the effects of takeover bid withdrawals. Finally, while bidder wealth is destroyed in takeover failures, the effect of merger cancellations on bidders is considerably more devastating.

The paper provides evidence of negative stock price reactions to all forms of merger failure. The paper also shows that the cumulative effect of all types of takeover failures is still positive: suggesting that being put into play is still beneficial overall but that canceled mergers destroy value for both targets and bidders. The paper shows that the market reaction to greenmail‐induced failure announcements is no worse than other forms of failure. Finally, while there is an immediate downturn in target prices around a failure, the negative outcome is more severe for the bidders. Thus, the market sees that there was something useful about the anticipated change in corporate control, which was lost when it failed to be completed.

In this study, the authors extend upon Brockman et al. (2008), who provide evidence that managers opportunistically accelerate bad news prior to share repurchases, but provide limited evidence that managers withhold good news until after repurchases. The authors examine management forecasts surrounding share repurchases in periods when companies must disclose detailed repurchase information. The authors argue these disclosures increase managers' legal and reputation risks of accelerating bad news, but have a lesser effect on delaying good news.

First, the authors examine whether managers alter the information released to the market before buying back shares by comparing managerial forecasts made within 30 days before the beginning of a repurchasing period with those made outside of this window. Second, the authors examine whether managers are more likely to provide good news forecasts, in terms of both magnitude and frequency, after buying back shares. Lastly, the authors examine the impact of CEO stock ownership on managerial forecasting behavior surrounding share buybacks.

Consistent with the authors’ hypotheses and contrary to Brockman et al. (2008), the authors find limited evidence that the likelihood or magnitude of bad news forecasts is greater in the period before share buybacks. Instead, the authors document that the frequency and magnitude of good news forecasts increase in periods following share buybacks and that these associations are positively moderated by managerial equity incentives. The authors also find that the withholding of good news is associated with lower average repurchase prices and greater repurchase volume. The authors further show that, when litigation risk is greater, managers are less likely to accelerate bad news prior to repurchases and more likely to withhold good news until after. Overall, the study results are consistent with managers balancing the benefits of opportunistic repurchase behavior with the costs.

This study contributes to the management forecast and share repurchase literatures by providing evidence consistent with managers opportunistically releasing earnings forecasts in the period after buying back shares. Most importantly, the authors show that after the rule revision, managers refrain from actively disclosing bad news that carry higher legal costs. Instead, they opt for the omission of good news to repurchase stocks at lower prices. The study results reconcile the conflicting evidence of Brockman et al. (2008) and Ge and Lennox (2011).